[144382] in North American Network Operators' Group
Re: NAT444 or ?
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Mark Tinka)
Sat Sep 10 02:11:59 2011
From: Mark Tinka <mtinka@globaltransit.net>
To: nanog@nanog.org
Date: Sat, 10 Sep 2011 14:11:19 +0800
In-Reply-To: <56A94CD0-4CE1-4C7A-85F3-201A84E17396@arbor.net>
Reply-To: mtinka@globaltransit.net
Errors-To: nanog-bounces+nanog.discuss=bloom-picayune.mit.edu@nanog.org
--nextPart1423113.RAURariBqc
Content-Type: Text/Plain;
charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
On Saturday, September 10, 2011 01:52:12 PM Dobbins, Roland=20
wrote:
> All this problematic state should be broken up into
> smaller instantiations and distributed as close to the
> access edge (RAN, wireline, etc.) as possible in order
> to a) reduce the amount of state concentrated in a
> single device and b) to minimize the impact footprint
> when aberrant traffic inevitably fills up the state
> tables and said devices choke.
Certainly a consideration when an ISP considers scaling=20
avenues for LSN's.
The issue is that there are simply too many variables, not=20
least of which is what business the ISP is in.
The mobile types are a lot more problematic because they=20
tend to centralize IP intelligence, and keep the RAN's=20
pretty simple (although the RAN's are now becoming more=20
intelligent thanks to your garden-variety IP vendors getting=20
into the game). What we've seen also, with some mobile=20
carriers, is that if you ask them to consider distributed IP=20
architectures, they/you quickly realize that IP routing=20
isn't really their core business or skill.
=46or your typical ISP, size notwithstanding, it will=20
invariably come down to how much money and effort they're=20
willing to spend or save with either centralized or=20
distributed architectures. Mind you, they're also battling=20
with other problems re: centralized or distributed=20
solutions, e.g., broadband aggregation, the ratio of=20
access:aggregation intelligence, access topology lay-outs,=20
e.t.c. And somehow, in all this mix, LSN's must work, be=20
they small units thrown around the network, or one or two=20
large monsters sitting somewhere in the core.
We've certainly considered both options very thoroughly.
Mark.
--nextPart1423113.RAURariBqc
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name=signature.asc
Content-Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.16 (GNU/Linux)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=LlDB
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--nextPart1423113.RAURariBqc--
